America's Unchallenged Youth...

[Tomorrow]

What to say to those that already know everything, and therefore refuse to listen to anyone? Silence.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

[Johnd]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Precisely. I was going to quip that the fuddy duddy has awoken (as in Elmer Fudd) and given some us some of his wisdom, but as you have changed you avatar once again, I'll say "SUCCOTASH! YOSEMITE SAMMMMM!"

What I don't get, most likely because it defies all logic and boundaries of respect, is while the nonbelievers apparently feel righteous in ridiculing the faithful, and this is even more true now just days before the second holiest of Christian holidays, I don't see any missionaries here attempting to convert the nonbelievers to Christianity. Respect?

 

[stratman]

In the truest sense Christianity is not about converting, its about proclaiming the gospel, what the hearer does or does not do with it is the choice that's made. I can't convert a person into Christian any more than a person sitting in a garage will turn into a car. Force conversions were never biblical to begin with. And you're so correct John, unbelievers go out of their way to bash a person of faith, where as a true Christian will never do that, except pray for the person who rejects the gospel. Merry Christmas John.

 

[markw]

And you're so correct John, unbelievers go out of their way to bash a person of faith, where as a true Christian will never do that, except pray for the person who rejects the gospel.

...but that just seems to rile them up even more.

Merry Christmas to all.

 

[dronezero]

Precisely. I was going to quip that the fuddy duddy has awoken (as in Elmer Fudd) and given some us some of his wisdom, but as you have changed you avatar once again, I'll say "SUCCOTASH! YOSEMITE SAMMMMM!"

What I don't get, most likely because it defies all logic and boundaries of respect, is while the nonbelievers apparently feel righteous in ridiculing the faithful, and this is even more true now just days before the second holiest of Christian holidays, I don't see any missionaries here attempting to convert the nonbelievers to Christianity. Respect?

You're painting with a broad brush. But anyways, why do you expect nonbelievers to respect you when you apparently don't respect them?

 

[Tomorrow]

Precisely. I was going to quip that the fuddy duddy has awoken (as in Elmer Fudd) and given some us some of his wisdom, but as you have changed you avatar once again, I'll say "SUCCOTASH! YOSEMITE SAMMMMM!"

What I don't get, most likely because it defies all logic and boundaries of respect, is while the nonbelievers apparently feel righteous in ridiculing the faithful, and this is even more true now just days before the second holiest of Christian holidays, I don't see any missionaries here attempting to convert the nonbelievers to Christianity. Respect?

If you're referring to me in your second paragraph, you're way off base. I wasn't responding regarding religious belief, John. That's why I edited your post as I did.

 

[Johnd]

You're painting with a broad brush. But anyways, why do you expect nonbelievers to respect you when you apparently don't respect them?

Umm, no, I'm not. I posted that thread because of several posts by one member. So whilst it was written generally, it was more or less directed at those who conduct themselves as that (im)poster does.

I "apparently" don't respect others? What do you know? I call it like it is. If you are referring to any single post of mine, please quote...there is one member here who insists on responding to almost every thread of mine out of context...intentionally. Iy you are referring to any posts between the two of us, read on, and educate yourself before you pass judgment on me.

And Merry Christmas.

 

[Johnd]

If you're referring to me in your second paragraph, you're way off base. I wasn't responding regarding religious belief, John. That's why I edited your post as I did.

No, I was not Tomorrow. I was referring to that (im)poster that continuously lambasts us with his atheistic drivel at the expense of those that have faith. It ought to be clear who he is if one does a little research. Despite all the false accusations, whilst I do like calling people out on their transgressions, I don't name them until they are courageous enough to call themselves out. I consider that fair play.

I bid you a Merry Christmas.

 

[Johnd]

In the truest sense Christianity is not about converting, its about proclaiming the gospel, what the hearer does or does not do with it is the choice that's made. I can't convert a person into Christian any more than a person sitting in a garage will turn into a car. Force conversions were never biblical to begin with. And you're so correct John, unbelievers go out of their way to bash a person of faith, where as a true Christian will never do that, except pray for the person who rejects the gospel. Merry Christmas John.

Thank you for the truisms. Merry Christmas Strat.

 

[Johnd]

...but that just seems to rile them up even more.

Merry Christmas to all.

Yes, that may be the case with the weak. It is not my intent to "rile" a person in their beliefs or faith. But for those that have no faith, no belief, what is one riling? Their nonbelief in a non-entity? Their utter lack of faith in God? It's ironic, isn't it?

In any event Mark, as Strat so poignantly wrote, it is the Christian's purpose to live the gospel. My posts directed at Schmoe were all responses to his posts. I make no apologies here.

It is brazen and disrespectful (as the newbie has inadvertently pointed out) to deride and ridicule the faithful at any time, and especially so during this second of holiest periods.

Merry Christmas Mark.

 

[dronezero]

Umm, no, I'm not. I posted that thread because of several posts by one member. So whilst it was written generally, it was more or less directed at those who conduct themselves as that (im)poster does.

My issue was with that you are writing generally when what you say doesn't apply generally. Just as there are a few theists that feel it necessary to shove their religion down your throat there are also a few nontheists that feel it necessary to shove their lack of religion down your throat. They are in the minority, however, in both cases.

I "apparently" don't respect others? What do you know? I call it like it is. If you are referring to any single post of mine, please quote...there is one member here who insists on responding to almost every thread of mine out of context...intentionally. Iy you are referring to any posts between the two of us, read on, and educate yourself before you pass judgment on me.

What do I know? I know nothing more than what you posted in this thread. For example, when Joe Schmoe told you that saying "I will pray for you" to somebody because they are atheist is insulting, you brush it off as being "so easily insulted" and "superficial angst." You say that you are just calling like it is, but I am sure that the nonbelievers who "feel righteous in ridiculing the faithful" think they are just calling it like it is as well.

And Merry Christmas.

Merry Christmas

 

[Johnd]

My issue was with that you are writing generally when what you say doesn't apply generally.

You need to be far more specific than that junior if you wish to develop an argument past the second grade level. If you have something productive to add, or have a general truism/insight to offer, I am happy to listen.

Just as there are a few theists that feel it necessary to shove their religion down your throat there are also a few nontheists that feel it necessary to shove their lack of religion down your throat. They are in the minority, however, in both cases.

I do not know what theists you speak of that are trying to "shove their religion" down my throat. Write accurately, and speak the truth. Again, you are speaking from ignorance, as I have never alluded to any shoving of religion.

What do I know? I know nothing more than what you posted in this thread. For example, when Joe Schmoe told you that saying "I will pray for you" to somebody because they are atheist is insulting, you brush it off as being "so easily insulted" and "superficial angst." You say that you are just calling like it is, but I am sure that the nonbelievers who "feel righteous in ridiculing the faithful" think they are just calling it like it is as well.

I never wrote "I will pray for you." I wrote we "pray for them." But your head is in the sand when you equate prayers for people in general with directed derogatory and ridiculing words that were quite personal. You are melding the two together. Which leads me to believe that you are either intentionally obfuscating the facts, or are simply out of your league.

Your ad hominems are misplaced. My response to Schmoe (now that you've let the cat out of the bag) was necessarily directed at him...as it was a response. Don't take this the wrong way: The kindest manner in which I can write it is that you argue on a second grade level and consistently misquote. You are out of your depth with me, so perhaps you can find someone else here to pick on, as your arguments lead nowhere...I can learn nothing at your level.

Merry Christmas

How can you possibly really mean that being the crusader for atheists and agnostics? Your disguise is quit thin, and I have already tired of it. Stop taking up valuable space with fodder, as I doubt anyone enjoys reading this drivel.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

But anyways, why do you expect nonbelievers to respect you when you apparently don't respect them?

Exactly. Praying for we heathens is showing disrespect because it is applying your beliefs, which we do not accept, to us. It also suggests that we have some sort of "sin" that requires forgiving, when we have not in fact done anything wrong (this is what makes it insulting.)
(Oh, and we also don't need "saving" because there is nothing to be saved from.)

 

[Johnd]

Exactly. Praying for we heathens is showing disrespect because it is applying your beliefs, which we do not accept, to us. It also suggests that we have some sort of "sin" that requires forgiving, when we have not in fact done anything wrong (this is what makes it insulting.)
(Oh, and we also don't need "saving" because there is nothing to be saved from.)

You still do not understand the term "disrespect," do you? It's really a rather simple definition.

Again, you are incorrect in writing that we show disrespect by praying. You are simply wrong. At best, you could argue that we show disrespect by flaunting it, taunting it, or repeatedly telling you we're praying for you against your wishes.

"Nothing to be saved from." And you continually toss around the term disrepect like an office joke. It is fitting that the term "disrespect" is in your vocabulary, understood (and/or properly applied) or not, rather than the term "respect." Continue to pray to yourself (and praise yourself) whilst ridiculing and condemning others' (beliefs).

 

[Joe Schmoe]

At best, you could argue that we show disrespect by flaunting it, taunting it, or repeatedly telling you we're praying for you against your wishes.

I concede that point. If you had simply continued wasting your time by praying for we active unbelievers and not said so in writing, I would never have known it and therefore this conversation would not be happening.
(Also, how can you construe stating the fact that "there is nothing to be saved from" as disrespectful? Is stating the fact that the Earth is round showing disrespect toward those who mistakenly believe it is flat?)

 

[Johnd]

I concede that point. If you had simply continued wasting your time by praying for we active unbelievers and not said so in writing, I would never have known it and therefore this conversation would not be happening.
(Also, how can you construe stating the fact that "there is nothing to be saved from" as disrespectful? Is stating the fact that the Earth is round showing disrespect toward those who mistakenly believe it is flat?)

To write to the faithful that there is no salvation, which is at the core of Christianity, is to call their faith..."hogwash." It is the epitome of disrespect. How can you not see that?

Put another way, were you to write I do not believe in salvation...I do not believe that there is anything to be saved from, is a whole different thing that making the universal declaration (that you just wrote) to those that do have faith. Ironically, it is the very thing drone referred to when he wrote "few nontheists that feel it necessary to shove their lack of religion down your throat." Hmmm.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

To write to the faithful that there is no salvation, which is at the core of Christianity, is to call their faith..."hogwash." It is the epitome of disrespect. How can you not see that?

Why would I need to merely imply that Christianity is "hogwash" when I have no problem with simply stating outright that it is? Nothing could be more offensive or disrespectful than when Christians say "I'm sorry" or give me that sad look because they just know I am going to hell (presumably along with all of the Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. who also don't believe the same thing as them.)

 

[spacedteddybear]

Luckily, since nobody has produced a documented record of the exact date of Jesus' birth ( let alone make up for the Julien calender to Gregorian), we can all very well drink our butts off on either the 22nd or the 25th. Assuming el J' was born on the 25th of January if recorded on the Julien calender, then Christians should actually celebrate Christmas on the 7th of January. Of course we can't blame this lack of documentation on Christians, or the fact that no mention of Jesus' birth was actually written until a few decades after his death.

Why would I need to merely imply that Christianity is "hogwash" when I have no problem with simply stating outright that it is?

Because while some christians have no problems with viewing the bible as a historical text, they do however get up all into an angst when someone actually treats it like a historical text ( Put it under critical analysis, and compare it with other historical texts of that era and etc).

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Because while some christians have no problems with viewing the bible as a historical text, they do however get up all into an angst when someone actually treats it like a historical text ( Put it under critical analysis, and compare it with other historical texts of that era and etc).

Interesting. My dad is a retired historian/professor who studied precisely that subject for many years. There is even an organization called "The Search for the Historical Jesus" of which he is a contributing member.

 

[Alamar]

Does anyone want to get back to the topic of Unchallenged Youth???

Disclaimer: I'm not a board admin so my opinion probably counts for LESS than most other folks around here.